No
Recovery where Stay Proceedings on, CBEC Accepts Court Judgements
Recovery
Proceedings only after Court Order
Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC)
has issued a circular dated 04.07.2016 on the issue of ‘’Recovery of confirmed
demand of tax during the pendency of stay application’’ in relation to indirect
taxes. Confirmed demand of tax arises, when after examining the submissions of
a tax payer, an order is issued confirming demand of tax from a tax payer.
The Circular provides that in cases where
stay application is pending before Commissioner (Appeals) or CESTAT for periods
prior to 06.08.2014, no recovery shall be made during the pendency of the stay
application. It may be noted that the law on the issue was amended on
06.08.2014, where after filing of appeal requires payment of 7.5 or 10 per cent
of tax demand, depending on stage of appeal, obviating the need for appellate
authority to hear any stay application.
The Circular further provides that in cases
where demand is confirmed by Hon’ble CESTAT or Hon’ble High Court recovery proceeding may be initiated
after a period of sixty days from the date of the order provided that no stay
is in operation.
The said Circular has been issued to ensure
that the assessee gets adequate opportunity to appeal
before recovery proceedings are started in indirect taxes. The Circular would
also bring uniformity in practice regarding recovery of confirmed demands of
tax.
[CBEC
Circular No. 1035 dated 4th July 2016]
Sub: Recovery of confirmed demands during the pendency of
stay application.
Kind attention is
invited to Board Circular No.
967/1/2013-CX dated 01.01.2013 on the
issue of recovery of confirmed demands during the pendency of stay application
filed by the assessee. Since then important changes
in law have been made and important judgments have come on the subject.
Accordingly, it has been decided to review the Circular.
Part
l: When stay application is pending before Commissioner (Appeals) or CESTAT:
2.0 The circular dated 01.01.2013 was examined by
Hon'ble High Courts in situations where stay applications
was pending before Commissioner (Appeals) or CESTAT. In this regard some of the
important judgments are L&T vs.
UOI [2013-TIOL-99-HC-CX) and Karnavati Club ltd. Vs UOl (SCA No. 2422/2013), wherein the Courts held that
recovery could be made only in cases where delay in deciding the stay could be
attributed to the conduct of the assessee. No appeal
was filed against these judgments of the Hon'ble high
Courts by the Department and thus these judgments attained finality.
3.1 However Hon'ble
High Court of Punjab and Haryana judgment in case of M/s PML Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central
Excise [2013-TIOL-201-HC-P&H-CX] pronounced that during the pendency of
stay, irrespective of the conduct of the assessee, no
recovery could be made. In para 46. Hon'ble Court
observed that:-
“...we are of
the opinion that right of consideration in appeal on an application for waiver
of pre-deposit. is a right conferred by the Statute
and such right cannot be defeated on the basis of Circular... ”
3.2 SLP filed by the Department [SLP (Civil)
765/2014] against the judgment of Hon'ble High Court
of Punjab and Haryana, has been dismissed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, thus upholding the decision of the Hon'ble
High Court. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court while dismissing the SLP, is reproduced below:-
"In view of
the judgment and order passed by this Court in
4.1 In light of the above judgments, the Circular No. 967/I/2013-CX dated 01.01.2013
is hereby rescinded and following fresh instructions are given on the subject.
It is also clarified that seven circulars which had been rescinded vide Circular No. 967/1/2013-CX dated 01.01.2013
shall continue to remain rescinded.
4.2 In cases
where stay application is pending before Commissioner (Appeals) or CESTAT for
periods prior to 06.08.2014, no recovery shall be made during the pendency of
the stay application.
4.3 For subsequent period i.e. from 06.08.2014
onwards, instructions contained in Circular
No. 984/08/2014-CX dated 16.09.2014 shall
continue to be followed. Section 129E of
the Customs Act. 1962 and Section 35F of the Central Excise Act 1944, as made
applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of
the Finance Act 1994, was amended vide Finance
Act, 2014 with effect from 06.08.2014.
Part
II: When demand is confirmed by Hon'ble CESTAT or Hon'ble High Court & stay is pending before Hon'ble High Court or Hon'ble
Supreme Court:
5.1 Attention is invited SI. No. 11 of the Circular No.
967/1/2013-CX dated 01.01.2013 providing that when a demand is confirmed by a Hon'ble CESTAT or a Hon'ble High
Court, recovery may be initiated immediately on the issue of order by the Hon'ble Tribunal or the High Court, if no stay is in
operation. Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in case of Karnavati Club Ltd. (SCA No. 2422/2013) examined the entire Circular dated 01.01.2013 and in relation to SI. No 11, in para
29 of the judgment, upheld the direction contained in the circular, without any
modification.
5.2 As a measure of liberalization and to ensure
uniformity of practice. it is hereby directed that, recovery proceeding in
relation to an order of Hon'ble High Court or
Tribunal confirming demand of duty, may be initiated only after a period of
sixty days from the date of order of the Hon'ble
Tribunal or Hon'ble High Court, as the case may he,
where no stay has been granted by Hon'ble High Court
or Hon'ble Supreme Court against the order of Hon'ble Tribunal or Hon'ble High
Court, respectively.
6.0 Instructions in CBEC's Excise Manual of
Supplementary instructions on the above subject or any other circular,
instruction or letter contrary to this circular stand amended to the extent of
the conflict.
7.0 Difficulties, if any, in the implementation
of above instructions may be brought to the notice of the Board.
F. No. 208/36/2012-CX.6